|
Post by eufrenio on May 28, 2005 7:44:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by eufrenio on May 28, 2005 7:49:57 GMT -5
.. But less Nordicist than Kemp! (p.6)
|
|
|
Post by Platypus on May 28, 2005 7:53:27 GMT -5
Obsolete or not, Coon's was a brilliant work for its time. This Nazi stuff is just their fantasy.
|
|
|
Post by eufrenio on May 28, 2005 8:23:41 GMT -5
Obsolete or not, Coon's was a brilliant work for its time. This Nazi stuff is just their fantasy. Of course, I was being ironic! I agree with you, Platypus. Being a fan of Coon´s, I wanted to show Coon detractors what real nazis are like!
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 28, 2005 8:58:55 GMT -5
Of course, I was being ironic! I agree with you, Platypus. Being a fan of Coon´s, I wanted to show Coon detractors what real nazis are like! None of that changes the facts about two things: 1) Coon is outdated and obsolete 2)Coon has definite involvement with segregationists during the Civil Rights Movement.
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on May 28, 2005 9:01:34 GMT -5
That doesn't change the following either:
1.) He wrote some good stuff. Deal with it.
AND
2.) He wrote some bad stuff. Move on.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on May 28, 2005 11:46:38 GMT -5
<<Coon has definite involvement with segregationists during the Civil Rights Movement.>>
Being a racialist or Segregationalist doenst mean being Nazi.You need to really move on.
Coon was an ace in his field for his time and era....But that doesnt mean I agree with him on certain points and some of his ideas and conclusions .
You know,some of his stuff has been proven wrong,while some is still correct .
|
|
|
Post by mike2 on May 28, 2005 11:48:43 GMT -5
Exactly. His political affiliations weren't any different from anybody else's back in the day. That's unfortunate, but that's just how it was.
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on May 28, 2005 11:49:20 GMT -5
The one the Nordicist/Germanist/White nationalist use is is not Coon, but Hans Gunther. He's their prophet and one they really quote and worship.
|
|
|
Post by human2 on May 28, 2005 12:16:55 GMT -5
There is nothing inherently immoral about wanting to preserve one's phenotype... segration. I can't see it.
The "un-Constitutional" part is actually forcing people to segregate.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 28, 2005 12:21:25 GMT -5
There is nothing inherently immoral about wanting to preserve one's phenotype... segration. I can't see it. The "un-Constitutional" part is actually forcing people to segregate. But at the expense of putting down others? I'm from the deep south so for me segregationists are vermin, I'm sorry. Black southerners had to endure alot because of lowlife segregationists wanting to preserve their 'phenotype' and their screwed up 'way of life' of white over black.
|
|
|
Post by human2 on May 28, 2005 12:24:08 GMT -5
I didn't say that.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 28, 2005 12:24:26 GMT -5
That doesn't change the following either: 1.) He wrote some good stuff. Deal with it. AND 2.) He wrote some bad stuff. Move on. His work delineating people into discrete races is obsolete and a member of AAPA should have nothing to do with segregationists, especially one like Putnam who used Coon's work to say that blacks are less evolved than whites.
|
|
|
Post by human2 on May 28, 2005 12:25:55 GMT -5
His work delineating people into discrete races is obsolete and a member of of AAPA should have nothing to do with segregationists, especially one like Putnam who used Coon's work to say that blacks less evolved than whites. Anthropology should never be mixed with politics. This is true. If you can't separate the two, choose one path to go down.
|
|
|
Post by topdog on May 28, 2005 12:27:00 GMT -5
I know you didn't but people in here seem to think that Coon's involvement with segregationists should not be scrutinised because alot of men thought like that back then, there's simply no excuse.
|
|